Hi everyone, The earlier link I sent out was just a snapshot of our progress, but isn't a full release, so I wouldn't recommend using it permanently.
The good news is that you can get these fixes into your "main" installation of Chrome by subscribing to the dev channel. The dev channel is where we publish new, frequent releases. The patches that potentially improved Plug-in (Flash) performance are in the latest dev release, 0.3.154, so if you subscribe, you should get the fixes right away. Information and instructions about subscribing to the dev channel are here: http://dev.chromium.org/getting-involved/dev-channel/ If you'd like to have these fixes in your Chrome installation, and don't mind getting the latest and greatest changes early, then please follow the instructions at this link to subscribe. We're continuing to work on Plug-in problems, so if you find problems (such as Facebook Attack), please post them in the issue tracker: http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/entry Thanks for all of your feedback!! Glenn On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 8:36 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I tried the download, but found the plugin to be even less responsive > when playing Facebook Attack. It didn't crash totally, as the beta > build does on occasion, however it didn't want to accept my input in a > reasonable timeframe. > > On Oct 4, 12:21 am, "Glenn Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Gene, Kirk & Daniel, > > We have a potential fix for this issue in a recent build. If you would, > > please try it out: > > > > http://build.chromium.org/buildbot/snapshots/chromium-rel-xp/2744/chr... > > > > No need to uninstall Chrome, just download and unzip this file and run > > "chrome.exe" inside the extracted folder. > > Please give this a try and let us know if this improves the issues you're > > seeing. > > > > Thanks for the report! > > > > Glenn > > > > On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 6:14 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > I have the exact same issues as explained by Kirk M. > > > > > Here are my specs: > > > > > Pentium 4 CPU 2.4Ghz > > > > > 1.49 GB Ram > > > > > Windows XP Service Pack 3 Build 2600 > > > > > Chrome Official Build 2200 > > > Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US) AppleWebKit/525.13 > > > (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/0.2.149.30 Safari/525.13 > > > > > Other apps: Google updater, AVG updater, OpenOffice Quickstart, > > > > > No other open applications. > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Gene... > > > > > On Sep 24, 10:50 am, "Glenn Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > If you wouldn't mind, would you post your system specs? > Specifically, > > > > > > * CPU > > > > * RAM > > > > * OS Version > > > > * Flash Version > > > > * Chrome/Chromium Version > > > > * What other applications or plug-ins you might have running > > > > > > This will certainly help us reproduce and fix this. Thanks! > > > > > > Glenn > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 7:32 AM, Kirk M <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > I have seen this as well and not only having the Flash plugin crash > but > > > > > the entire browser as well. I tested this with Flash versions > 9.0.124, > > > > > 10 beta (8/18/08) and 10 beta (9/15/08). Behavior is basically the > same > > > > > using all 3 versions. This behavior did not improve with Dev > version > > > > > 0.2.152.1 either. I keep SysInternals' Process Explorer running in > the > > > > > Tray and can always tell when Flash is causing trouble when the > (single > > > > > core) CPU shoots to 100%. The browser becomes unresponsive (as does > the > > > > > entire OS at times) however, the misbehaving website/plugin dialog > box > > > > > for the Flash plugin only comes up once in awhile in these cases > and > > > > > that usually takes a couple of minutes to happen (long time to wait > > > when > > > > > one is cooking their CPU). > > > > > > > The Flash plugin for Chrome I believe is the same one that Firefox > and > > > > > Opera make use of and is admittedly known for it's poor quality as > > > > > compared to the version for IE. Because of this, Opera and Firefox > has > > > > > always had significantly worse performance with Flash based media > than > > > > > IE. Obviously Chrome suffers from the same thing but much worse. > > > > > > > On 9/24/2008 12:54 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > > ... inside Chrome 0.2.149.30 > > > > > > have others seen this? > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chromium-discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-discuss?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
